About your Search

20130201
20130209
STATION
CSPAN 9
CSPAN2 7
FBC 3
CNBC 1
CNN 1
CNNW 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 25
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)
deficit, and these are decisions that will have real and lasting impacts on the strength and pace of our recovery. economists and business leaders from across the spectrum have said that our economy is poised for progress in 2013. and we've seen signs of this progress over the last several weeks. home prices continue to climb. car sales are at a five-year high. manufacturing has been strong. and we've created more than six million jobs in the last 35 months. but we've also seen the effects that political dysfunction can have on our economic progress. the drawn-out process for resolving the fiscal cliff hurt consumer confidence. the threat of massive automatic cuts have already started to affect business decisions. so we've been reminded that while it's critical for us to cut wasteful spending, we can't just cut our way to prosperity. deep, indiscriminate cuts to things like education and training, energy and national security will cost us jobs, and it will slow down our recovery. it's not the right thing to do for the economy. it's not the right thing for folks who are out there still lo
melissa francis. lori: i am lori rothman. we will learn how hi our deficits could rise. melissa: we will hear from the president in just a couple minutes. we will bring you the remarks live. lori: immigration reform also on the top earner today. we will hear from business leaders on how reform should be done. lou dobbs weighs in. melissa: our very own charlie gasparino goes one-on-one with municipal analyst. that should be very interesting. lori: let's get things started with the latest addition of stocks now. the 20 you see volatility here. the fix is to the downside today on a day where we are gaining triple digits, unlike yesterday where we love triple digits. the majority of the dow components are in the green. we have economic numbers showing expanding numbers in the u.s. service. we will take a look at a longer term chart. back to you. lori: thank you, as always. melissa: breaking news. the budget office releasing the latest numbers. what we can expect our deficit to be. rich: $845 billion for this year. this is the first time in five years. let's take a look at the next ten y
we are projected to the a big deficit below one of a trillion for the first time in five years. later, the mayor of san antonio and justified -- testifies on capitol hill about immigration policy. some of the automatic spending cuts delayed in december are scheduled to take effect next month. on the next "washington journal," we will talk about those cuts and program such as medicare and social security. severna, 40 5:00 a.m. eastern. our guest is from texas, and at 8:0020, a democratic congressman, henry waxman, of california, on efforts to combat climate change. your phone calls and tweeds, "washington journal," 7:00 a.m. on c-span. president obama announced his plan to avoid automatic spending cuts known as sequestration scheduled to begin march 1. it is including tax changes. the president spoke to reporters for just over five minutes. >> good afternoon, everybody. i wanted to say a few words about the looming deadlines and decisions that we face on our budget and on our deficit, and these are decisions that will have real and lasting impacts on the strength and pace of our recove
is president obama really cares about the deficit. if there is something he noticed in the first two years when the economic crisis had to be front and center, the thing he wanted to deal with was the long-run deficit. the idea that he went on a spending binge if you don't make threats like that is crazy. the evidence is there that he put spending cuts on the table. he asked them for them to be paired with tax increases as well. there is more good will than people realize. more agreement that we have such a big budget problem that will we're going to fire on all cylinders. we have to cut spending. frankly, we have raise more revenue. >> you're listening to the california program and our speakers are economic experts. we are discussing national, regional, and global economic challenges. you can find video online. there's a series of questions around employment and job growth. what what is your outlook on job growth? >> i will start. i think -- i will say i was here last year and i'm more optimistic this year than last year. we made a significant amount of progress. it looks like housing prices h
will be gradual. and on the downside we have thrown a lot of roadblocks in its path. we have a debt and deficit situation which in the long term are unsustainable, and we're doing absolutely nothing to correct that. nothing. i know cbo's forecast was that we would see modest improvement in the jet crashing into debt-to-gdp ratio the next two years but i don't believe the. i don't like their forecast. i do with 4% growth is going to venture lies with the 0% increase in the interest rate. just don't see it happening. if you get when you're going to get the other one taking up and that will be very, very difficult to maintain a stable or declining debt-to-gdp ratio. but even cbo has a debt-to-gdp ratio picking up at the end of the 10 year horizon. so we have to stabilize the debt. we haven't fixed the debt. and, in fact, we spread the crisis out so that we really won't go a month without one. we have the fiscal cliff at the end of the year. nothing was done in the later part of the year. and then in the 11th hour, actually it wasn't the 11th hour. it was about the 15th hour, two and half hours aft
people like laura tyson writing columns calling for the need for a plan for faster growth, not deficit reduction. what is the president -- i know you've talked about how all the president's plans envision job creation, but what does the president tell his advisors when he sees these signs of a sluggish recovery? what is he asking in the way of things to speed recovery, create jobs and stimulate growth? >> i'll go to the narrow question first. every time the president meets with his economic advisors to discuss policy proposals and refinements to existing policies, the focus is on job creation and economic growth. and that includes when we have discussions about deficit reduction. as i've said many times and as the president has made clear, deficit reduction is not a goal unto itself. it is a means to, if done right , the desired goal, which is greater growth and greater job creation. as part of an overall economic policy. i would note that today's jobs figures and the revisions that we saw in previous months' jobs figures mean that over 35 months we have created 6.1 million private sec
that we need higher fuel tax, and we can use that either to reduce the deficit or to pay for something else. it was designed -- or intended -- whether it has done so successfully or not, it was done to pay for infrastructure. >> absolutely. we are not real happy about that. >> john, what are you hoping for next week? >> for some reason, i have not been consulted on that. the president in the campaign said he was 4 and all of the above energy policy, so let's have some announcements that support that -- he was for an " all of the above" energy policy. let's move forward with the things that you need to do to accomplish that policy. i would say that we would also -- i would like to see stop this discussion about taxing the industry and trying to characterize it as subsidies, which is simply not true, and i would like to see more opportunities in terms of where we can open up areas that are off-limits right now. all those combined can generate an enormous amount of opportunity for the economy right when we need it. >> i will just mention a couple of things. i think lenders have been reall
in washington. lori: you look at our ballooning national debt in the battle over the current deficit. what is the best outcome? >> that would be for the federal government to reduce spending. that is just all there is to it. lori: where exactly? i have to interrupt you, we are not getting enough detail as to where those tough cuts should come. >> i think they should come from everything. we definitely have to have some entitlement reform. you are seeing an explosion in expenditures in all areas of government. it will have to be trimmed back. one of the things we will be doing is finding those areas in our respective jurisdictions. lori: how do you think about the meat cleaver, if you will, regarding the cuts? >> well, it will happen unless the president wants to come to talk to us about meaningful cuts. the house has passed two bills now. this president is basically says no and does not want to talk to us. he needs to come talk to us. otherwise, it will happen and it will be very tough on a lot of different areas. lori: one silver lining in this national small business association, or econ
: the dow hitting 14,000 with nicole on the air. this is a snapshot of just how bad our deficits are going to be over the next ten years. dagen: rich edson is live in washington, d.c. rich: $1.1 trillion, that was our deficit for 2012. this is the most recent projections by the office. this year, a budget deficit -- the decade production was $2.26 trillion. these numbers will be much different. much worse. it must examine the budget as if congress does absolutely nothing. and current policy continues. we have had some changes. mainly that built that passed congress earlier in the year. millions of middle-class americans do not have to pay the amt. it also changed the estate tax bumping down the rate of little bit lower than what it had been over the exception of little bit higher. the numbers we just show you, the real numbers will be much worse. we will find out at 1:00 o'clock. back to you. dagen: are we going to be in a statement from the white house at 1:15 p.m.? rich: he will talk about the sequester. he will push for congress to pass a smaller package of spending cuts and tax reform
into deficit spending and debt, should we not at least apply some standards and some principles in terms of where and how we allocate funds that are sent to us by the taxpayer? i've asked each agency to do that. we haven't received any reports back. all we hear is from a number of voices around town, oh, no, we can't touch any of this. every dime that we spend is absolutely necessary. well, i think what senator coburn has done and begun to do and what i hope to do and also work with him and others is to identify some of those areas and literally ask the question to my colleagues and to the american people, do you think this is really an essential function of the federal government? is this something that maybe we would like to do but don't have the money to do or is this something that frankly has just not lived up to its promise, is wasting money, or is this something that never should have been passed in the first place? if we don't apply those principles to our future spending, we're going to continue down this road. now, we all know that the big three, social security, medicare and m
have a deficit. here's a project that gets substantial tax revenue without raising taxes through economic activity, through job creation. further and perhaps most importantly, it will help put our country within striking range of a long-sought goal -- true energy security. for the first time in generations, the united states with its friend and ally canada will have the capacity to produce more energy than we use, reducing or eliminating our reliance on the middle east and other volatile parts of the world. the argument has been advanced that the oil sands will increase carbon emissions and that failing to build the keystone x.l. will somehow reduce emissions. but let's look at that claim. that's the other piece. let's look at the environmental aspects of this project. today, more than 80% of all new recovery in the oil sands is being accomplished in situ, a technology that makes oil sands carbon footprint comparable to conventional drilling. in fact, the oil sands industry has reduced greenhouse gas emissions per barrel of oil produced by an average of 26% since 1990, with some
, even if there weren't inflation. >> greg? >> i would add ironically the budget deficit is falling. certainly as a percentage of gdp and we'll get on tuesday, i think, from the congressional budget office new budget figures that show, in fact, that the deficit is dropping and dropping pretty significantly. >> guys, one last question to each of you. you have been watching the markets for so long. we have near records for stocks. gdp that shrank, jobs growth that is okay. why is the market so excited about what's happening either corporate profit or the economy? >> you know, that is a good question. i think a lot of people have been asking it. i think we have been in the context of record corporate profits. the fundamentals of the stock price. if you added up all the money that the market forecasts that the company will make in the future, that's how much the stock should be worth. so, record corporate profits in some sense should have been reflected in higher prices already. and now, the only reason they weren't, i think, is because people were afraid that washington might blow it u
a chart yesterday that the deficit has already fallen from $1 trillion to $648 billion with the cuts they did in 2011. as far as taxes, they need to change the tax code. businesses need to pay their fair share. i get $22,000 in my civil service and social security. i paid $448 in taxes last year. i am 76 years old. i am barely surviving. host: you mentioned at the beginning that your daughter-in- law, where she employed with a company that depended on government financing? >> yes, some government contracts, so they froze things to try to save jobs and then last friday they laid off five people. -- they froze hiring. host: willie is with us on the line. caller: i look at it like this, when you have a drought, in order to break the drought, everybody has to pay for it. a storm, you have to have a hurricane or a tornado to break a drought. some people are going to get flooded out. so i hope that it will go through. let it do what it is supposed to do and get this stuff straightened out. everybody's looking out for themselves. i worked for general motors. the only thing that got general
a $16 trillion deficit, 51 million people on food stamps. our culture is an entitlement culture and yet we're going after 13 million people who have an immigration problem. hey, i'm all for vetting them. how about reverse discrimination for once in this country. if we're going to demand exceptionalism, we should have it towards the immigrants whether they come legally or illegally and also go back to americans who are u.s. citizens. >> are you talking about expelling americans? >> i'm all for demotion of citizenship. i agree with you. it may be extreme. but here's my point. how many of you. >> keep it short. >> how many of you have a trouble in a third world country and you come back to america and have a different experience about exceptionalism. what about reverse immigration? >> i do not support the deportation of american citizens but if that were to be a policy, what you would do is save hundreds of billions of dollars a year in the welfare state because immigrants are less likely to use welfare each when naturalized and americans who are poor. that's an interesting result of that.
in the right direction. but midway through that cut that back and went back to spending cuts and deficit reductions. critics say basically if they would have left it alone, if they would have left the economy alone it would have righted its own ship. the massive government spending of world war ii, that sucked a lot of people back into labor market at a terrible humanitarian cost got the economy back running. host: there have been some folks, part of the administration, part of the democrats that say infusing money and coming up with these stimulus projects will help get the economy going. is this a similar situation to what f.d.r. tried to do coming out of the great depression? guest: threrp definitely parallels between the stimulus law of 2009 and what f.d.r. wanted to do. one major difference was where the stimulus sort of relied on the private sector. they had is civilian conservation core. this time they've tried to put money into contracts that private firms will get and then hopefully hire private workers. i think the thing about the stimulus is i bet 80 years from now we'll be de
the deficit problem. there is no question about it. but i think when they look at this bill and understand what we are really facing, i do not believe that we will have a problem there. >> [inaudible question] [talking over each other] >> it is different great obviously, we have two different versions. the house has this attrition of the workforce that has been the component and we had a combination for every new positions, we had one and then two, and we can bind both so we are on the same page. the house proposal on the attrition and we have also added congressional papers on it as well for the civilian workforce. >> [inaudible question] >> i would certainly defer to others here and the chairman. there is a real urgency here. one of the reasons that the president and his administration during his campaign, they didn't actually want the law that requires you to notify workers that they may be laid off, essentially the department of labor says the defense employers didn't have to comply with that law, it's because they knew that once they understood the real implications of sequestration,
unemployed right now. we're not out of the deficit of the 8 million jobs already lost. in terms of a system being skewed, if we are continually supported a system where jobs go to the already employed, we are really not doing anything to foster the economic recovery that is going to benefit everybody. in society. none of these laws and nothing the national employment law practice is advocating says you have to fill open jobs with unemployed people. we are saying that qualified unemployed people should be allowed to compete on terms that are fair and that is good for all of us in our economic recovery. host: baltimore, maryland, just hired. caller: i would like to say one thing -- i love cspan and site -- and i love to make it through my phone call. go ravens. i live in baltimore city and the unemployment rate in baltimore city is unbelievable. the problem you have is that not only is there so many people unemployed but that there is a lack of job opportunities. how will the work that you are doing affect people live in urban america who are african- americans who are latino americans, asian
's a little schizophrenia going on. a lot of folks think we need to cut and solve the deficit and now when we face cuts and face austerity, it's very difficult. the bottom line is that because of the divided government, it's very difficult for there to be a global solution that would, you know, make a lot of rationale sense. and, instead, we're facing a series of cuts like the sequester that although they look disorganized are slowly getting us towards a more balanced budget. i think the markets have pretty much digested the fact that the sequester is likely. i doubt that it will have a significant impact on the markets because i think everybody already knows it's likely to happen. >> this goes back, again, to one of your concerns. certainly a concern for a lot of people in the u.s., which is where is the middle any more inspect and it's interesting because in your career you've switched parties. explain that move. are there going to be any more like you? >> well, you know, i used to be a moderate republican and now it's a moderate democrat. but the truth is, there aren't very many moderates
thing with the deficit commission he created withers kin bowles a few years back. he is paying a lot of lip service to the american public about their top concerns and top concerns of this country and not having a lot of action or substantive action to bring about real solutions. bill: here are the fact we know, alan. in 24 months they met four times. >> correct. the empty met with them four times. there were other meetings the president did not attend. by the way they have been active 16 of 35 proposals and only two year charter. i wonder were republicans praise worthy when they formed the council and saying we don't need a council. that will not create jobs. now all of sudden they're upset he is ending the council. they never sported it first place. bill: implemented 16 recommendations. can you name one. >> i don't have the list here, but all the reports come out say that's what he did. bill: can you name one that worked? >> i don't have the list of them, bill. but the fact is the cynical, cynicism you seem to express as though simply having a jobs council, that is what creates job
in mind you are objective is to get the deficit below 20% by 2015. we are on track for that. we need to pay overtime allowances for agency workers and so on on new year's. the congress and the u.s. government operate differently than government here. the strategy with enough time to achieve that. there is a constant explanation to people as to how you intend to get the. we need european support. in that sense, the united states is such a huge country. with such potential. i believe that i think the united states also needs to look at the global positioning because of the impact on the world economy. >> thank you very much. i'm sorry that we are going to have to draw this to a close. i was hoping that the irish prime minister with a a message saying that if you could only get your act together and cure these problems, it would be so much better for europe and the world. but you are way too much of a diplomat for that. [laughter] >> thank you very much. i'm sorry we cannot take more questions. it's been a fascinating session. please join me in thanking the a >> there is no prescription
'm not politically correct. i'm sorry. but, you know, our -- the deficit is a big problem. think about it. [applause] our national debt $16.5 trillion, you think that's not a lot of money? i'll tell you what, count one number per second. you can't even do. once you get to $1,000 it takes you locker than a second. one number per second. do you know how long it would take to $16 trillion. 507 million years to get there. here is the parable, a family follows -- falls on hard time. dad loses the job or gets demoted and has five children. he comes to the five children and says we have to reduce your allowance. they're not happy about it. but he said, except for john and susan. they're special. they goat keep their allowance. we may give them more. how do you think that's going to go down? not too well. the same thing happens. enough said. what about our taxation system? so complex there's no one who can possibly comply to every. i want to get you for you, i can get you on a tax issue. that doesn't make any sense. what we need to do is come up with something that is simple. and when i pick up my bible, yo
. >> reporter: the president will largely focus his attention on immigration reform and deficit reduction exactly one week ahead of his state of the union address. >>> a tragic story. new details on the death of a new york city mom murdered in turkey. >> she was supposed to come back and she didn't. >> they must have luck on their side. ste stephen and terri weaver were on a weekend getaway and returned with two lottery tickets. are you kidding me? >> couldn't believe we won twice. couldn't believe we had won as much as we did. >> jesse, will you come out? >> a gentleman never kisses and tells. >> pucker up. all right. >> loser pays up. boy, is al roker paying right now. >> here's what's happening in your neck of the -- your neck of the woods. >> l.a. reid, the music mogul and jennifer hudson. >> katharine mcphee is inside our studio warm and toasty. >> you remember her, tiffani thiess thiessen, of "saved from the bell." >> john harbaugh is with us from new orleans. >> we were watching your show in the room. you guys do a great job. we love your show. >> yes, there are men on trampolines
.s. citizens and quite the contrary. have you thought of doing something? we have a $16 trillion deficit, we have fifty-one million people on food stamps, our culture is an entitlement culture and yet we are going after a thirteen million people with an immigration problem. eyewall for vetting them. what about reverse discrimination? we are going to demand exceptionalism we should have it towards the immigrants when they come here legally or illegally and we shall so go back to americans who are u.s. citizens. >> are you talking about expelling americans? >> i'm for the notion citizenship. [talking over each other] >> i may be extreme but here's my point. how many of you -- [talking over each other] >> how many of you have traveled to historic countries? you come back to america you have a different perspective about exceptionalism. how about reverse immigration? >> i did not support the deportation of american citizens. i would say this. if that were to be a policy, you would save hundreds of billions of dollars in the welfare state because individual immigrant, likely to use welfare especi
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)